Full fledged tablets running complete OS have existed.

[hugodrax]

Tablets running a complete OS have already existed for years. One example is the Samsung Q1 series of tablets running Windows XP or Windows 7.

With all the features that the Ultrageeks have been crying about missing on the iPad.

But for years tablets have been poor sellers, relegated to a small niche and expensive.

In the end these expensive tablets never did well in the market, don't you think Apple took into considering the fact that what Ultrageeks want is not a good market? Since the other companies have been building such tablets for years, only to not do well in the markets.

I had the first Q1 and the experience sucked. It could run any windows app.

 

[master-ceo]

Apple whores think apple is the only OS that can get bizzy.

Many options out their that has FLASH and the Camera their crying about.

booo hooo

 

[HellDiverUK]

Many options out there that has FLASH and the Camera they're crying about.

HTH.

 

[Rapmastac1]

Even back in 2004 there were devices called UMPC (Ultra Mobile Personal Computers). They didn't do well because they were ridiculously expensive, slow, unresponsive, didn't have much storage space, very basic connectivity, and the OS wasn't very good on such a mobile platform.

I applaud Apple in daringly putting a MOBILE OS on a mobile device. Just because it has full Mac OSX doesn't mean it will be better. It would only be better if it were built from the ground up to be a mobile, touchable platform. This is where the iPad comes in. Now if Apple didn't have the platform so locked down it would be MUCH better since it would essentially have the same approach a normal OS has.

And like you said, it sucked using that because Windows just doesn't work well on a mobile platform. While all these new "slate" devices coming out, only a few of them are worth getting and those are the ones that have a better OS. Lenovo has a special version of Linux for it's slate platform and it works well.

 

[Night Spring]

I applaud Apple in daringly putting a MOBILE OS on a mobile device. Just because it has full Mac OSX doesn't mean it will be better. It would only be better if it were built from the ground up to be a mobile, touchable platform. This is where the iPad comes in. Now if Apple didn't have the platform so locked down it would be MUCH better since it would essentially have the same approach a normal OS has.

Exactly. I currently have a jailbroken ipod touch, and it is indeed a full-fledged OS built from the ground up for a mobile, multi-touch device. The only limitation has been the small screen size. The ipad's bigger screen would finally allow the iPhone OS to reach it's full potential. I'm not sure why Apple is holding it up by locking it down like it is now, but even without multitasking and a locked down file system, once apps are written for it that takes full advantage of the bigger multi-touch screen, many of the people who are now crying out for "full OSX" is going to realize that a "full iPhone OS" is just as powerful as OSX.

 

[KnightWRX]

Even back in 2004 there were devices called UMPC (Ultra Mobile Personal Computers). They didn't do well because they were ridiculously expensive, slow, unresponsive, didn't have much storage space, very basic connectivity, and the OS wasn't very good on such a mobile platform.

I applaud Apple in daringly putting a MOBILE OS on a mobile device. Just because it has full Mac OSX doesn't mean it will be better. It would only be better if it were built from the ground up to be a mobile, touchable platform. This is where the iPad comes in. Now if Apple didn't have the platform so locked down it would be MUCH better since it would essentially have the same approach a normal OS has.

And like you said, it sucked using that because Windows just doesn't work well on a mobile platform. While all these new "slate" devices coming out, only a few of them are worth getting and those are the ones that have a better OS. Lenovo has a special version of Linux for it's slate platform and it works well.

Apple isn't the first to put a Mobile OS on a tablet. There have been Maemo based devices around for a while, and Android tablets have begun shipping late last year.

Guess how well those Mobile OS on a mobile platform sold ? As poorly as any other tablets. It's the form factor itself that is the problem, not the OS. Tablets are very much niche devices.

 

[Night Spring]

Apple isn't the first to put a Mobile OS on a tablet. There have been Maemo based devices around for a while, and Android tablets have begun shipping late last year.

Guess how well those Mobile OS on a mobile platform sold ? As poorly as any other tablets. It's the form factor itself that is the problem, not the OS. Tablets are very much niche devices.

Just because an OS is called "mobile," doesn't mean it really is. I don't have any direct experience with Android or Maemo, but I bet they aren't as intuitive or easy to use as iPhone OS. I know that personally, I've always wanted a tablet since I had my first notebook computer, but it was always the OS that put me off, not the form factor. To be more specific, none ot the "tablet OS" I've tried took full advantage of the tablet form factor. The iPhone OS as implemented on the iPhone and iPod touch is the first fully usable tablet OS I've come upon. Having that on a bigger screen can only make the user experience better.

 

[KnightWRX]

The iPhone OS as implemented on the iPhone and iPod touch is the first fully usable tablet OS I've come upon. Having that on a bigger screen can only make the user experience better.

It's functional on a phone or PMP. Not on a full scale computing device. Some of its faults are only made worse by the bigger screen.

Push notification isn't enough for one. The limitations on installing apps is another.

And how can you be put off by Maemo or Android if you've never tried them out ? Closed mindedness much ? Sounds like you're just getting hyped up because this is an Apple product, not because of any advantages/disadvantages of the product itself.

The tablet form factor is the very problem and the reason why these aren't mainstream. After the hype dies down on the iPad, we'll see if it can break out of that niche.

 

[Night Spring]

And how can you be put off by Maemo or Android if you've never tried them out ? Closed mindedness much ? Sounds like you're just getting hyped up because this is an Apple product, not because of any advantages/disadvantages of the product itself.

It's true that I haven't tried Maemo or Android, but according to you, they haven't sold much -- I take that as evidence that they are about as useful/easy to use as other tablet systems I *have* tried. In other words, they aren't.

And I'm not an Apple fangirl, in fact I curently prefer using Windows over OSX. But the iphone/ipod touch UI has totally sold me, and despite the shortcomings like no multitasking and less than optimal notification system, which by the way are easily fixable by software updates, I'm convinced that having that OS on a bigger screen means finally a tablet that is easily usable and will have mass appeal.

 

[lilo777]

But for years tablets have been poor sellers, relegated to a small niche and expensive.

In the end these expensive tablets never did well in the market, don't you think Apple took into considering the fact that what Ultrageeks want is not a good market?

You comparison is pointless because you compare future Apple product with products released two years ago. Back then all components (screens, flash etc.) were inferior and very expensive. Now iPad will be competing with similarly priced tablets which have better specs and full fledged OS.

 

[flopticalcube]

With the appearance of tablet netbooks, the tablet space is going to get a lot more crowded on the low end, which I view as a good thing. Hopefully, MS can get Windows 7 mobile going.

 

[G4R2]

It's been demonstrated fairly convincingly that desktop UI's, whether it's Windows, Linux, or OS X, just don't translate well on tablet form factors.

Apple clearly realized this and didn't want to diminish the value of the OS X desktop software by ruining the experience on a tablet. It also doesn't make sense for Apple to have three different UI's, one for phones, one for desktops/laptops, and one for tablets.

Additionally, with OS X they would have had to select an Intel compatible chip which strategically is not a direction Apple is heading in. Alternatively, they would have had to recompile OS X and its apps for the ARM architecture, which would have been a mess for everyone.

They can prove the OS is scaleable to whatever device they choose to make (maybe Apple TV will be replaced with this leaner OS which may very well be more appropriate). They've shown they can tightly link the OS to their own custom processors. And customers are left with a familiar UI, thousands of applications, and what appears to be great performance.

They made the right choice with the iPhone OS, which is essentially a version of OS X.

 

[Rapmastac1]

I remember when the iPhone came out, nobody wanted a PDA cell phone, and with a whole touch screen as well. Now look, everyone and their grandma has one!

Just because a certain product didn't do well at one point and time, doesn't mean it won't do well later on, or with a different approach. Can you imagine if the iPod came out five years earlier... it wouldn't have done so well because it was VERY dependent on iTunes, which not a lot of people had access to at that time.

Most of the older devices that are similar took the "let's make a pc but very small". It just doesn't really work. Apple's approach is a little different as they have seem to say "let's take a mobile device and make it bigger". They are using the "cloud computing" idea everyone is talking about now. It's a different approach and it may just work.

The Android platform is great, open, and has a bright future and honestly with a little work, may work well as a Tablet device. As of now though, it isn't there yet.

 

[KnightWRX]

I remember when the iPhone came out, nobody wanted a PDA cell phone, and with a whole touch screen as well. Now look, everyone and their grandma has one!

Wait what ? Blackberries were hugely popular back in 2004, a whole 3 years before the iPhone. People did want a PDA cell phone.

The iPod and iPhone were both very typical of what was already on the market in 2 hugely popular and growing markets. The iPad is a very typical product in a very niche market.

 

[hugodrax]

Apple isn't the first to put a Mobile OS on a tablet. There have been Maemo based devices around for a while, and Android tablets have begun shipping late last year.

Guess how well those Mobile OS on a mobile platform sold ? As poorly as any other tablets. It's the form factor itself that is the problem, not the OS. Tablets are very much niche devices.

They are niche devices because they are a pain in the ass to work with. Full fledged window's shoehorned int a underpowered tablet,horrible UI that scales poorly just does not make for a compelling offering.

Not only that but they were expensive.

iPad got it right and watch it sell by the truckload. Then all the other folks will be scratching their heads why the iPad sells but their superduper Tablet running Windows7 with USB,CF slot,camera,etc.. is selling poorly.

 

[marksman]

The iPad is running a complete OS.

On top of that it is running the best and most successful mobile OS in the history of the world, combined with the best and most successful mobile user interface in the history of the world.

That other comapnies have managed to force any OS on to a tablet like device is neither news nor relevant.

There is no device now or coming any time soon that competes in the same space as the iPad. They have created an entire new market segment.

You don't believe me? Watch for all the "clone' announcements of iPad killers in the next 12 months.

 

[KnightWRX]

They are niche devices because they are a pain in the ass to work with. Full fledged window's shoehorned int a underpowered tablet,horrible UI that scales poorly just does not make for a compelling offering.

Not only that but they were expensive.

iPad got it right and watch it sell by the truckload. Then all the other folks will be scratching their heads why the iPad sells but their superduper Tablet running Windows7 with USB,CF slot,camera,etc.. is selling poorly.

You ignored the part where I mentionned that Apple isn't the first to use a mobile OS, built for touch interfaces, on a tablet device right ? You just had to go straight to bashing.

Next time, read the post before bashing it.

On top of that it is running the best and most successful mobile OS in the history of the world

Wait, says who ? iPhone OS is not the most successful mobile OS in the history of the world.

 

[marksman]

Guess how well those Mobile OS on a mobile platform sold ? As poorly as any other tablets. It's the form factor itself that is the problem, not the OS. Tablets are very much niche devices.

Android's UI sucks compared to the iphone/ipad os. It is not comparable.

These devices have not failed because of the form factor.

Like I said this is the first device of its kind in this segment.

 

[Peace]

And they have all flopped.

 

[QuarterSwede]

It's all about the UI. How many people already know how to use the iPhone? I'm not sure the iPad will sell like the iPhone did (almost every mobile phone had a crappy UI back then) but it wouldn't surprise me if it took a certain part of the lower end laptop market.

I'm considering one to replace my 5 year old 12" PB instead of buying a MacBook. With an iPhone and an iMac (soon to have) already, I'll be nicely covered. Heck, even my wife is considering it since the 16GB costs half of a MacBook for when she replaces her MacBook and she's technologically ignorant (typical average Joe consumer). That's the real proof for me.